Possession vs Ownership.

[RickD427]

Provided that the purchase is legal in both states (the state where purchased and the buyer's state of residence). This has always been the rule (even when purchases were limited to contiguous states).

This is because of federal law, not California law. States in general cannot enforce their rules outside their boundaries.

But I would question the statement about possession by a Californian in Texas. What crime has been committed?

I can't think of any crime that would be committed if a California resident simply possessed a firearm in "Baja Oklahoma", assuming that the possession was legal under Texassonian law.

But please note that Mr. "Dogtown Tom"'s comment was about "buy and possess" (noting specifically the use of the conjunctive term "and"). His comment was correctly made because the California resident cannot "buy" a rifle in Texas, even if they could lawfully possess the same rifle in Texas.

It's not an issue of trying to apply California law to Texas, you're correct in that California law doesn't apply in Texas, but in this case it's the federal law (that does apply in Texas) that referenced provisions of California law.

The terms "Purchase (or Buy)", "Transfer", and "Possess" all have different meanings and it's important to carefully consider their uses in the statutes.